Industrial Diseases: Compensation

Paul Farrelly: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many claims by former miners or their families have yet to be settled in respect of compensation for  (a) chronic bronchitis, emphysema or other respiratory diseases,  (b) vibration white finger,  (c) carpal tunnel syndrome and  (d) pneumoconiosis in (i) Stoke-on-Trent Central, (ii) Stoke-on-Trent North, (iii) Stoke-on-Trent South, (iv) Stone and (v) Stafford constituencies; and how many claimants in each category have received interim payments.

Malcolm Wicks: holding answer 11 June 2007
	The following tables show the information requested. Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) covers chronic bronchitis and emphysema.
	
		
			Stoke-on-Trent, Central constituency  Stoke-on-Trent, North constituency  Stoke-on-Trent, South constituency 
			Miners  Families  Miners  Families  Miners  Families 
			 COPD claims Claims registered 762 1,123 928 1,710 1,578 1,752 
			  Claimants who have received an interim payment 112 161 135 274 165 240 
			  Total outstanding 124 427 141 653 237 691 
			  Total settlements 638 696 787 1,057 1,341 1,061 
			 
			 VWF claims Claims registered 434 55 446 56 993 96 
			  Claimants who received an interim payment 152 11 187 11 408 29 
			  Total outstanding 32 5 47 5 110 6 
			  Total settlements 402 50 401 51 883 90 
			 
			 Carpal Tunnel Syndrome claims Claims registered 43 6 34 3 108 3 
			  Claimants who received an interim payment 20 4 15 1 60 2 
			  Total outstanding 4 1 4 — 22 1 
			  Total settlements 39 5 28 3 86 2 
		
	
	
		
			Stone constituency  Stafford constituency 
			Miners  Families  Miners  Families 
			 COPD claims Claims registered 592 532 133 135 
			  Claimants who have received an interim payment 37 70 6 10 
			  Total outstanding 79 209 14 52 
			  Total settlements 513 323 119 83 
			   
			 VWF claims Claims registered 340 22 74 7 
			  Claimants who received an interim payment 135 4 30 1 
			  Total outstanding 29 1 11 — 
			  Total settlements 311 21 63 7 
			   
			 Carpal Tunnel Syndrome claims Claims registered 36 3 — — 
			  Claimants who received an interim 21 3 — — 
			  Total outstanding 9 1 — — 
			  Total settlements 27 2 — — 
			  Note: The figures include almost 5,000 overseas claims. 
		
	
	The Department is unable to identify those COPD claims which include a pneumoconiosis element. However, under the Coal Workers Pneumoconiosis Scheme (CWPS) we have received 83,759 claims, 82,595 of which have been settled by payment, denial or withdrawal.
	We have realised that there was an error in the answer given to the parliamentary question tabled on the 6 June 2007, recorded in  Hansard on 23 May 2007,  Official Report, column 1351W, regarding the figures for pneumoconiosis under CWPS. I have written to you about the error and will place copies of the letter in the Libraries of the House.

Park and Ride Schemes

Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many grants his Department gave for park and ride schemes in each year between 2000 and 2006.

Gillian Merron: Most park and ride schemes are implemented by local authorities at their discretion from the general transport funding provided by Government. In addition, the Department provides project specific funding for the construction of larger transport schemes. Between 2000 and 2006, nine of these schemes have included elements of park and ride.
	Funding for each scheme may span a number of years. The following table shows a breakdown of the nine schemes according to the year their funding began.
	
		
			   Number 
			 2000 0 
			 2001 0 
			 2002 1 
			 2003 0 
			 2004 4 
			 2005 1 
			 2006 4

Park and Ride Schemes: Bridlington

Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what criteria were used by his Department in approving a park and ride scheme for Bridlington.

Gillian Merron: The Bridlington Integrated Transport Scheme, which includes a park and ride element, was given an initial approval (Programme Entry) by this Department in July 2006.
	The decision to fund the scheme was based on the Department's assessment of East Riding of Yorkshire Council's business case. This assessment looks, in particular, at the strategic case, value for money, deliverability, and financial and commercial aspects. The value for money assessment takes into account economy, safety, integration, environment and accessibility.
	All new major local authority schemes, for which project specific funding is sought, are assessed according to these criteria.

Vehicle Number Plates: Fire Services

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans there are to integrate on-board cameras on fire engines into the Automated Number Plate Recognition database.

Stephen Ladyman: There are no plans to integrate on-board cameras on fire engines with the DVLAs Automatic Number Plate Recognition [ANPR] database of unlicensed vehicles. DVLAs ANPR system is subject to stringent type approval testing by the Home Office to enable detected offenders to be taken to court for prosecution direct from the digital image captured by the cameras. Other cameras are not type approved and therefore offenders detected by other cameras would not be subject to prosecution.

Agriculture: Subsidies

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will re-examine the position of commoners associations as the vehicle for making single farm payments to those who graze on commons; and which cases of such payments have been suspended.

Barry Gardiner: A number of claims have been submitted under the single payment scheme by commoners associations and those that the Rural Payments Agency have confirmed meet the scheme eligibility criteria have been allocated entitlements and received associated payments. The eligibility status of remaining claims is being considered on a case by case basis with the commoners associations concerned.

Agriculture: Subsidies

Geoffrey Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many and what percentage of claimants in  (a) Torridge and West Devon and  (b) the south-west for the single farm payment scheme in (i) 2005 and (ii) 2006 have been paid their payments (A) in full and (B) in part.

Barry Gardiner: As of 6 June 2007, a total of 104,618 of farmers in England have received either a full or partial payment under the 2006 single payment scheme year. This total includes 98,750 full and 5,868 partial payments. This represents 96 per cent. of the estimated total claimant population of 109,000.
	RPA's target is to pay 96.14 per cent. of the total value of the fund by 30 June 2007.
	Detailed analysis of all the payments made under the single payment scheme is not yet available. Once the remaining scheme payments have been completed, a decision will be taken on the level of detail that will be published.

Carbon Emissions

John Redwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the percentage change in carbon dioxide emissions by the Government was over the course of 2006.

Ian Pearson: Energy data compiled for the Sustainable Development Commission's Sustainable Development in Government Annual Report 2006 shows that there was a 2.3 per cent. reduction (after correcting for weather variations) in annual carbon emissions from Government buildings during the period April 2005 and March 2006.
	Figures for the financial year to March 2007 are currently being compiled and will be published by the Sustainable Development Commission later this year.

Devolution: Co-operation

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of processes in place to facilitate co-operation between the Scottish Executive and the Government.

Douglas Alexander: A memorandum of understanding sets out the over-arching principles that underpin relations between the UK Government and the devolved administrations. The Government have no plans to revise this memorandum of understanding.

Housing Benefit: Warrington

Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many claims for housing benefit were dealt with by Warrington borough council in each of the last five years; and what the average award was in the most recent period for which figures are available.

James Plaskitt: The available information is in the following table.
	
		
			  Housing benefit (HB) claims in Warrington borough council 
			   Number of HB claims 
			 2002-03 5,014 
			 2003-04 n/a 
			 2004-05 3,469 
			 2005-06 4,124 
			 2006-07 2,940 
			 n/a = Not available  Notes: 1. Figures are for financial years. 2. For 2006-07 the data is from April to December 2006. As at November 2006, the average weekly amount of housing benefit in Warrington borough council was £58.21. 
		
	
	Performance management information returned by local authorities to the Department is published on the Housing Benefit Operational Database (HoBOD). HoBOD can be accessed using the following link:
	http://www.dwp.gov.uk/asd/hobod

International Labour Organisation

Denis MacShane: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions which Ministers attended the International Labour Organisation's annual conference in each year since 2000.

Anne McGuire: The following Ministers have attended the International Labour Organisation's annual conference since 2000:
	right hon. Tessa Jowell 2000 and 2001;
	Malcolm Wicks 2002;
	Maria Eagle 2003;
	Chris Pond 2004; and
	James Plaskitt 2005, 2006, and 2007.

New Deal for Disabled People

Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many participants in the new deal for disabled people left the scheme for sustainable employment in each month since it was initiated.

Jim Murphy: holding answer 18 May 2007
	Up to the end of November 2006, new deal for disabled people (NDDP) had been successful in helping 134,160 people into work, including 101,720 people who had registered with, and received assistance from, an NDDP job broker.
	Information on job sustainability is available to March 2006. Of the 78,970 people who had gained a job through a job broker to March 2006, 54,090 had gained a sustained job.
	A new deal for disabled people (NDDP) job is regarded as sustained when a person who has been placed into work through an NDDP job broker remains in work for 13 out of 39 weeks. Prior to October 2003, an NDDP job was regarded as sustained when a person, placed into work through an NDDP job broker, remained in work for 26 out of 39 weeks.
	Information on those who are recorded as leaving NDDP with an immediate destination of employment, which was also recorded as a sustained job, is in the following table.
	
		
			  New deal for disabled people (NDDP) 
			  Month  Number of leavers with a recorded immediate destination of sustained employment 
			 January 2002 20 
			 February 2002 60 
			 March 2002 130 
			 April 2002 170 
			 May 2002 210 
			 June 2002 150 
			 July 2002 140 
			 August 2002 190 
			 September 2002 250 
			 October 2002 240 
			 November 2002 350 
			 December 2002 300 
			 January 2003 470 
			 February 2003 340 
			 March 2003 460 
			 April 2003 430 
			 May 2003 800 
			 June 2003 500 
			 July 2003 400 
			 August 2003 590 
			 September 2003 520 
			 October 2003 1,260 
			 November 2003 1,020 
			 December 2003 850 
			 January 2004 1,180 
			 February 2004 1,170 
			 March 2004 1,160 
			 April 2004 1,090 
			 May 2004 950 
			 June 2004 1,140 
			 July 2004 1,490 
			 August 2004 1,350 
			 September 2004 1,210 
			 October 2004 2,030 
			 November 2004 1,450 
			 December 2004 1,610 
			 January 2005 1,930 
			 February 2005 1,960 
			 March 2005 1,640 
			 April 2005 1,610 
			 May 2005 1,510 
			 June 2005 1,750 
			 July 2005 2,140 
			 August 2005 1,670 
			 September 2005 2,120 
			 October 2005 1,680 
			 November 2005 1,630 
			 December 2005 1,880 
			 January 2006 2,010 
			 February 2006 2,100 
			 March 2006 2,240 
			  Notes: 1. All figures have been rounded to the nearest 10. 2. Separate data on whether a job is sustained through NDDP is not collected centrally after March 2006. 3. The new deal for disabled people programme was introduced in July 2001.  Source: Information Directorate, Department for Work and Pensions

Remploy: Closures

Iain Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what criteria were used to determine whether a Remploy factory would be eligible for  (a) closure and  (b) merger.

Anne McGuire: In deciding eligibility for potential closure Remploy took into account several factors; the market for the product made at the factory, the likely ability to achieve acceptable losses per disabled employee in the future, the percentage of cost which is covered by income from customers and the local employment market.
	For mergers the Company not only took into account the above factors, but also considered the proximity to another factory which was not potentially closing.
	We will consider the Company's final proposals once they have been submitted later in the year following consultation. No decision by the Secretary of State on the future of the Company will take place until then and the Government encourages participation in the consultation process by contacting Bob Warner on Tel: 02476 515810 or writing to him at: Remploy, Stonecourt, Siskin Drive, Coventry, CV3 4FJ.

Remploy: Closures

Iain Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what representations were made by  (a) management and  (b) staff regarding the possible closure of the Remploy factory in Hartlepool;
	(2)  what consideration was given to merging the Hartlepool and Stockton Remploy factories as an alternative to closure.

Anne McGuire: In drawing up the closure proposals Remploy took into account the market for the product made at their factories, their likely ability to achieve acceptable losses per disabled employee in the future, the percentage of its cost which is covered by income from its customers and the local employment market and the proximity to another factory which was not closing was considered.
	The Remploy Board's proposals signal the next phase in the development of a 5-year modernisation plan—a formal consultation with trade unions and employees and a disability impact assessment as part of Remploy's Disability Equality Duty obligations.
	The Government will consider the Company's final proposals once they have been submitted later in the year following consultation. No decisions by the Secretary of State on the future of the Company will take place until then.
	No representations have been made to Government on the proposed closure of the Hartlepool factory. If there are strong arguments against the proposed closure of the Hartlepool factory, the Board of Remploy would be happy to fully consider them.
	The Government encourages participation in the consultation process by contacting Bob Warner Chief Executive of Remploy on Tel: 02476 515810 or in writing at: Remploy, Stonecourt, Siskin Drive, Coventry, CV3 4FJ.

Social Security Benefits: Payments

Philip Dunne: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many days in advance of payment to claimants of  (a) income support,  (b) jobseeker's allowance,  (c) disability living allowance and  (d) pension credit his Department transfers funds to banks.

James Plaskitt: Funds for the payment of DWP benefits and allowances are transferred to banks on day three of the BAGS processing cycle. This is normally the same day that payment is credited to the claimant's bank account.

Winter Fuel Payments

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what recent assessment he has made of the implications of changes in energy prices for the level of the winter fuel allowance.

James Purnell: The winter fuel payment is a significant contribution to winter fuel bills which account for around 60 per cent. of the year's total fuel bill. It has risen from £20 to £200 from winter 2000-01 and to 300 for people aged 80 or over from winter 2003-04.
	Fuel prices are volatile, and can fall as well as rise. Although fuel prices have risen since 2003 this follows a period of no change between 1997 and 2003, and following recent falls in wholesale gas prices, companies are now starting to announce reductions in retail prices. It would not be sensible for the rate of winter fuel payments to track the upward and downward movement of fuel prices.

Armed Forces: Burma

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the British Government provides pensions to any Burmese soldiers who fought alongside the British in the Second World War.

Derek Twigg: The British Government no longer provide pensions to Burmese soldiers who fought alongside the British forces in the second world war. Responsibility for the payment of these pensions was transferred to the Government of Burma in 1947, ahead of Burma gaining independence in January 1948.

Armed Forces: Deployment

Christopher Fraser: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the average tour interval was for  (a) Army,  (b) Royal Navy,  (c) Royal Air Force and  (d) Royal Marine personnel in the latest period for which figures are available.

Adam Ingram: The average tour interval for LAND Units is 26.5 months.
	
		
			  Arms and services tour intervals—February 2007 
			   Infantry  Royal Armoured Corps  Royal Artillery  Royal Engineers  Royal Signals  Royal Logistic Corps 
			 Tour interval (months) 24.7 39.1 22.4 19.7 25.4 28.0 
			 Tour interval (average) 26.5 months 
		
	
	For Royal Navy personnel, deployments are not to be longer than nine months. A ship's programme aims for 60 per cent. of the time on deployment and 40 per cent. of the time alongside at the base port over a two-year rolling period. Current activity for surface ships is approximately 53 per cent. away, 47 per cent. at home.
	Tour intervals for the Royal Marines in 3 Commando Brigade RM varies between units but on average is 34 months, although this does not reflect individual company deployments which have been more frequent.
	Data on RAF average tour intervals is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Armed Forces: Housing

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many staff were employed at the Modern Housing Solutions Helpdesk in Speke, Liverpool in each month since it was established.

Derek Twigg: The information requested is set out in the following table:
	
		
			   Number employed 
			  2005  
			 July 1.0 
			 August 2.0 
			 September 2.0 
			 October 2.0 
			 November 2.0 
			 December 19.0 
			   
			  2006  
			 January 63.0 
			 February 68.5 
			 March 63.0 
			 April 85.0 
			 May 85.0 
			 June 98.5 
			 July 100.5 
			 August 113.0 
			 September 122.0 
			 October 114.0 
			 November 102.5 
			 December 113.0 
			   
			  2007  
			 January 108.0 
			 February 106.0 
			 March 99.0 
			 April 101.0 
			 May 86.5 
		
	
	There was no specific "go-live" date for the helpdesk. The contract was dated 14 November 2005 and was rolled out on a regional basis from January 2006. Modern Housing Solutions built up the Helpdesk during that period. Staff were in place before the contract was signed as MHS knew from April 2005 that it was the preferred bidder.
	When MHS began delivering services, the number of calls received was higher than anticipated, requiring additional staff to be employed on the Helpdesk. Over time, however, the need has reduced for these additional staff, resulting in a reduction in staff between April and May 2007.

Departments: Advertising

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which  (a) advertising agencies and  (b) other organisations supplied consultancy services for advertising campaigns for (i) his Department and (ii) its agencies in each of the last five years; and what the cost of these services was.

Derek Twigg: The only advertising undertaken by the Ministry of Defence is recruitment related.
	Armed forces recruitment advertising is bought through the Central Office of Information (COI). Under the terms of the COI framework agreements advertising agencies are contracted to supply advertising services only and not to supply broader consultancy services.
	The Royal Navy uses two advertising agencies for its recruit advertising activities, procured through the COI. These are 'Wright Collins Rutherford Scott', and 'Glue London'. No additional external organisations are used to provide consultancy services.
	The Army has not bought any advertising services outside of those procured through the COI. Currently, the Army is working with 'Zenith Optimedia' to deliver advertising campaigns.
	The Royal Air Force currently works with the advertising agency 'Delaney Lund Knox Warren' to deliver its advertising campaigns. It has not procured any organisations to supply wider consultancy services for those campaigns.
	Information on the recruitment of civilian staff is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Ex-servicemen: Military Decorations

Jeremy Browne: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many ex-servicemen and women in Somerset  (a) applied for and  (b) were subsequently issued with (i) an HM Armed Forces Veterans Badge and (ii) a UK Merchant Seafarers Badge.

Derek Twigg: holding answer 11 June 2007
	The information on Veterans Badges is not held in a format that identifies how many badges were applied for and subsequently issued, it is possible to give information only on how many are issued. I can confirm that 3,060 Veterans Badges have been issued to ex-servicemen and women in Somerset since 2004.
	Information relating to the Merchant Seafarers Badge is not held in a format that allows counties to be readily identified. However, I can confirm a total of 5,634 badges have been issued since the scheme began on 27 June 2006.

Departments: Epilepsy

Nick Hurd: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many people with epilepsy are employed by his Department; and if he will make a statement.

Stephen Timms: HM Treasury publishes a wide range of data on disability and diversity in its annual report and on its website (www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/about/about_disability_equality.cfm). The number of officials with epilepsy is not detailed as this could identify individual members of staff.

Departments: Meetings

Mark Francois: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will place in the Library a copy of the minutes of each meeting he attended on 10 May.

John Healey: On 10 May the Chancellor attended Cabinet and then Treasury oral questions. It is not the practice of this of other administrations to release the Minutes of Cabinet or other meetings.

Eligo International Limited

Mark Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the  (a) date,  (b) value and  (c) purpose was of each payment made by (i) his Department and (ii) its agencies to Eligo International Limited since 1997.

John Healey: None of the Chancellor's departments or agencies have found any records of payments to Eligo International Limited within the last five years. Changes in accounting systems mean that a positive confirmation for all bodies over the whole period since 1997 could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Lone Parents

Frank Field: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the Office for National Statistics most recent estimate is of the number of lone parents; and how many lone parents claim tax credits.

Stephen Timms: The Office for National Statistics (ONS) and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) use different definitions of lone parents and the statistics they produce refer to different time periods and are therefore not comparable.
	The tax and benefit system defines a couple as either a man and a woman who are either married or 'living together as husband and wife' or two people of the same sex who are either civil partners or living together as such. The Labour Force Survey (LFS) asks about the adults living in a household, and they count an adult as being single if they do not declare another adult in the household as being their partner.
	ONS estimates that there are 1.9 million lone parents in the UK, based on the 2006 Labour Force Survey data. The HMRC 2005-06 Finalised Award data show that on average 2.1 million families claimed child tax credit, or the equivalent via benefits, as a single adult.

Social Security Benefits: Migrant Workers

David Laws: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  what the Government's policy is on payment of child tax credit to migrant workers in respect of children living outside the UK if such individuals receive child related benefits in the home country; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  which social security benefits are payable to the  (a) children and  (b) spouses of EU migrant workers who are in the UK for dependants who are living abroad but in the EU; and if he will make a statement.

Stephen Timms: The main purpose of child tax credit (CTC) and child benefit (ChB) is to support families living in the United Kingdom, The general rules for these benefits do not provide for them to be paid in respect of children who reside outside the UK. However, these general rules are supplemented by the co-ordinating rules in EC Regulations 1408/71 and 574/72, which the United Kingdom has applied since it joined the European Economic Community in 1973. The Regulations protect the acquired social security rights of European Economic Area (EEA) workers and their families moving within the Community.
	The Regulations have detailed rules that determine which scheme a worker should contribute to, and which state has responsibility for the payment of family benefits. In general, it provides that the worker pays into the social security scheme of the member state where the work takes place and that state is responsible for the payment of family benefits If entitlement to family benefits arises in more than one member state, the Regulations contain priority rules to determine who has responsibility for paying. More detailed information relating to these Community rules can be found in leaflet SA29 "Your social security insurance, benefits and healthcare rights in the European Economic Area", published by the Department of Work and Pensions and available on their website.

Taxation: Charitable Donations

Hugo Swire: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what tax incentives relating to giving to charities are in place; and what the cost of each was to the public purse in each of the last five years.

Stephen Timms: There are several tax incentives available to individuals wishing to make financial donations to charity. These include gift aid, payroll giving, relief on gifts of shares and securities and land and buildings. Gifts of assets to charities are also exempt from capital gains tax and the value of outright gifts and bequests by individuals to UK charities are completely free of inheritance tax, subject to certain provisions preventing donors retaining some degree of interest. Full details are available on the HMRC website at http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/charities/donors/tax-efficient.htm.
	Estimates of the costs of reliefs on donations to charities by individuals are also published on the HMRC website.
	Figures for the basic rate relief on Gift Aid donations can be found at table 10.1 http://www.hmrc. gov.uk/stats/charities/table10-1.xls
	Table 10.2 http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/charities/table10-2.xls contains the costs of the following reliefs to individuals:
	Higher rate income tax relief on Gift Aid donations;
	Income tax relief on Payroll Giving donations;
	Income tax relief on gifts of shares, securities and real property;
	Inheritance tax relief on bequests to charities.
	Figures for relief from capital gains tax and corporation tax on charitable donations are not available.

Absent Voting

Oliver Heald: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice what estimate her Department has made of the proportion of postal vote identifiers which were checked in the 2007 local elections.

Bridget Prentice: The Government have asked the Electoral Commission to review and report on the introduction of personal identifiers for absent voting in England and Wales and, in particular, the use of the personal identifiers at the 3 May 2007 elections in England and Wales. We expect to have a clearer picture of the proportion of postal vote personal identifiers which were checked when the Electoral Commission produces its report, which it has been asked to do by 31 July 2007. A copy of the report will be made publicly available when it is produced.

Prison Service: Professional Standards Unit

Henry Bellingham: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice what the functions are of the Professional Standards Unit at HM Prison Service in the  (a) gathering and  (b) evaluation of intelligence about misconduct among (i) staff and (ii) inmates at prison establishments; and if she will make a statement.

Gerry Sutcliffe: The Prison Service Professional Standards Unit receives, develops and analyses intelligence on staff misconduct. The gathering and evaluation of this intelligence is carried out by area and local professional standard managers.
	It is not within the remit of the Professional Standards Unit to be involved in prisoner related intelligence unless there is a staff misconduct element.

Prisoners: Repatriation

John Spellar: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice pursuant to the answer of 22 May 2007,  Official Report, column 1257W, on prisoners: repatriation, when she expects discussions with other governments regarding prisoner transfers to commence.

David Hanson: The United Kingdom has prisoner transfer arrangements with 96 countries and territories. The majority of these countries are signatories to the Council of Europe Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons. On 3 and 4 of May 2007 preliminary discussions were held in Strasbourg to discuss a Greek proposal for a Second Additional Protocol to the Convention. This would extend the circumstances under which a prisoner can be transferred without his or her consent. The United Kingdom is supporting this proposal.
	The UK has concluded 20 bilateral prisoner transfer agreements from which we hold about 400 sentenced prisoners. While this number is not insignificant, resources are at present dedicated towards negotiating agreements that are likely to deliver significant benefits such as the EU prisoner transfer agreement and the second Additional protocol to the Council of Europe Convention.

Victim Support Schemes: Counselling

Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice 
	(1)  how many victims of miscarriages of justice and their families have been offered post-traumatic stress counselling in the last 12 months; and if she will make a statement;
	(2)  how many prisoners were released after the quashing of their convictions by the Court of Appeal following a reference from the Criminal Cases Review Commission in each of the last five years; what support and after care they were offered; and if she will make a statement.

Gerry Sutcliffe: We do not collect data on the number of prisoners released after the quashing of their convictions by the Court of Appeal.
	The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) an executive NDPB which was set up under the Criminal Appeal Act 1995 and which became operational in January 1997 aims to review alleged and suspected miscarriages of justice, and to refer them to the Court of Appeal, whenever they consider that there is a real possibility that a conviction, verdict, finding or sentence would not be upheld.
	Support and after care is offered to victims of miscarriages of justice from the Miscarriages of Justice Support Service, operated by the Citizens Advice Bureau at the Royal Courts of Justice, by the Ministry of Justice. It is funded under a three year contract. It aims to ensure that victims of miscarriages of justice receive appropriate advice, guidance and support. Advice and support is offered at every stage of the process. This includes: finding accommodation; establishing income; applying for national insurance credits; registering with a GP and accessing appropriate healthcare and counselling; opening a bank account and budgeting; family/relationship issues; employment and training needs; finding a solicitor to deal with compensation claims.
	All clients of the Miscarriages of Justice Support Service are offered counselling as part of their initial assessment interview with an adviser. In the past 12 months, 25 new cases have been taken on by the service, and seven clients have received an assessment by a consultant forensic psychiatrist. Following assessment, the psychiatrist refers the client for appropriate ongoing counselling. Families are not part of this assessment, but the psychiatrist may recommend that they are involved in family therapy if appropriate.

Young Offender Institutions: Crimes of Violence

David Lidington: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice how many  (a) assaults by prisoners on staff and  (b) assaults by prisoners on other prisoners there were in each young offender institution in each year since 2003.

Gerry Sutcliffe: The information requested is set out in the following table. The data is taken from the Prison Service Incident Reporting System and the figures therefore relate to incidents reported.
	
		
			  YOI  Assault type  2003  2004  2005  2006 ( 1) 2007 
			 Ashfield Prisoner on officer 62 71 152 127 21 
			  Prisoner on other 8 19 28 9 4 
			  Prisoner on prisoner 271 304 500 625 130 
			
			 Aylesbury Prisoner on officer 15 5 15 18 2 
			  Prisoner on other  1 2   
			  Prisoner on prisoner 26 21 78 80 18 
			
			 Brinsford Prisoner on officer 31 26 17 8 2 
			  Prisoner on other 8 8 2 2  
			  Prisoner on prisoner 304 326 344 187 28 
			 Castington Prisoner on officer 52 53 50 42 10 
			  Prisoner on other 4 4  4 1 
			  Prisoner on prisoner 312 384 361 360 88 
			
			 Deerbolt Prisoner on officer 5 25 32 21 8 
			  Prisoner on other 1 3 1 1  
			  Prisoner on prisoner 167 205 164 152 31 
			
			 Feltham Prisoner on officer 102 169 129 115 24 
			  Prisoner on other 1 4 9 3 1 
			  Prisoner on prisoner 569 576 549 476 105 
			
			 Glen Parva Prisoner on officer 27 39 31 40 12 
			  Prisoner on other 2   5 1 
			  Prisoner on prisoner 241 230 269 341 75 
			
			 Hindley Prisoner on officer 23 13 30 55 9 
			  Prisoner on other 4 1 2 3 1 
			  Prisoner on prisoner 111 63 112 348 98 
			
			 Huntercombe Prisoner on officer 18 15 14 32 6 
			  Prisoner on other 1  1 1  
			  Prisoner on prisoner 77 79 95 184 53 
			
			 Lancaster Farms Prisoner on officer 9 27 46 51 13 
			  Prisoner on other  1 1 5 2 
			  Prisoner on prisoner 17 185 435 363 96 
			
			 Northallerton Prisoner on officer 11 13 10 6  
			  Prisoner on other 8 9 4 3 2 
			  Prisoner on prisoner 82 84 104 82 20 
			
			 Portland Prisoner on officer 15 39 37 41 9 
			  Prisoner on other 1  3 1  
			  Prisoner on prisoner 61 125 154 127 36 
			
			 Rochester Prisoner on officer 15 16 23 13 1 
			  Prisoner on other 1 2
			  Prisoner on prisoner 51 102 78 100 22 
			
			 Stoke Heath Prisoner on officer 20 37 52 63 14 
			  Prisoner on other  2 4 6 2 
			  Prisoner on prisoner 137 239 438 506 108 
			
			 Swinfen Hall Prisoner on officer 8 4 10 9 1 
			  Prisoner on other 1   1  
			  Prisoner on prisoner 110 96 104 89 18 
			
			 Thorn Cross Prisoner on officer 3 1 I 3  
			  Prisoner on other 1   1  
			  Prisoner on prisoner 39 7 19 143 17 
			
			 Wellington Prisoner on officer 21 18 19 19 1 
			  Prisoner on other 3 1  3  
			  Prisoner on prisoner 129 104 139 143 18 
			 Wetherby Prisoner on officer 11 70 66 56 10 
			  Prisoner on other 3 7 6 4 1 
			  Prisoner on prisoner 175 414 492 401 86 
			 (1) Year to 28 March 2007.

Antisocial Behaviour Orders

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many antisocial behaviour orders were breached in  (a) England and Wales and  (b) Gloucestershire in each year since the introduction of the penalty; and if he will make a statement.

Vernon Coaker: holding answer 6 March 2007
	antisocial behaviour order (ASBO) breach data are currently available up to 31 December 2005 for ASBOs issued since 1 June 2000. The available information is given in the following table.
	
		
			  N umber of persons proven in court to have breached their ASBO in England and Wales and in the Gloucestershire criminal justice system (CJS) area( 1)  in each year 
			  Area  2000( 2)  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005 
			 England and Wales 13 124 254 715 1,864 3,390 
			 Gloucestershire — 1 1 5 13 36 
			 (1)( )ASBOs may be issued in one area and breached in another. In this table ASBOs breached in Gloucestershire are counted irrespective of whether issued in Gloucestershire or not. (2) From 1 June 2000. No ASBO breach data are available prior to this date.  Notes: 1. It is possible for an individual to breach their ASBO in more than one year, so persons may be counted more than once in this table. 2. Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.  Source: OCJR Court Proceedings Database

Antisocial Behaviour Orders: Greater London

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many anti-social behaviour orders were  (a) issued and  (b) breached in each month of the last five years in (i) each region and (ii) each London borough.

Vernon Coaker: Data collected centrally on the number of antisocial behaviour orders (ASBOs) issued is compiled on a quarterly basis. Data, up to 31 December 2005 (latest available), broken down by Criminal Justice System (CJS) area is given in table A.
	Information on the number of ASBOs issued by the local authority area within which prohibitions have been imposed is published annually. These can be found on the crime reduction website at: http://www.crimereduction.gov.uk/asbos/asbos2.htm and are given in table B.
	ASBO breach data are available annually by CJS area only. Information is given in table C.
	
		
			  Table A: Number of antisocial behaviour orders issued at all courts as reported to the Home Office by the Court Service, by Criminal Justice System area, year and quarter, 2001 to 2005, England and Wales 
			2001  2002 
			  CJS area  Total issued  Jan-Mar  Apr-Jun  Jul-Sep  Oct-Dec  Total  Jan-Mar  Apr-Jun  Jul-Sep  Oct-Dec  Total 
			 Avon and Somerset 210 3 8 3 5 19 1 4 2 3 10 
			 Bedfordshire 82 2 0 0 2 4 0 3 1 0 4 
			 Cambridgeshire 95 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 2 
			 Cheshire 208 0 0 0 2 2 0 5 7 1 13 
			 Cleveland 111 0 2 2 0 4 0 1 1 3 5 
			 Cumbria 114 0 0 0 1 1 0 3 5 5 13 
			 Derbyshire 118 1 1 0 4 6 2 0 0 0 2 
			 Devon and Cornwall 177 3 4 3 0 10 0 1 0 2 3 
			 Dorset 75 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Durham 91 3 2 1 3 9 2 2 1 3 8 
			 Essex 149 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 
			 Gloucestershire 66 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 
			 Greater London 1,144 4 4 4 3 15 5 2 2 12 21 
			 Greater Manchester 1,225 3 1 7 14 25 8 15 23 32 78 
			 Hampshire 270 1 1 1 3 6 1 2 3 4 10 
			 Hertfordshire 144 4 1 2 2 9 1 1 2 2 6 
			 Humberside 227 1 0 1 2 4 1 2 1 0 4 
			 Kent 156 10 1 1 5 17 1 0 0 15 16 
			 Lancashire 352 4 3 1 3 11 4 6 2 1 13 
			 Leicestershire 116 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 
			 Lincolnshire 43 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 2 0 2 
			 Merseyside 297 2 4 0 1 7 3 6 4 9 22 
			 Norfolk 117 7 0 4 1 12 9 0 0 0 9 
			 Northamptonshire 82 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 1 0 1 
			 Northumbria 297 0 2 0 7 9 9 1 3 3 16 
			 North Yorkshire 91 0 1 6 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Nottinghamshire 251 0 8 3 0 11 1 0 1 0 2 
			 South Yorkshire 244 1 0 4 2 7 2 4 6 7 19 
			 Staffordshire 166 2 2 2 0 6 2 9 1 0 12 
			 Suffolk 165 0 2 0 2 4 1 0 0 4 5 
			 Surrey 108 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 2 
			 Sussex 241 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 10 6 16 
			 Thames Valley 161 2 3 0 2 7 2 1 3 0 6 
			 Warwickshire 86 1 0 1 0 2 3 3 4 5 15 
			 West Mercia 223 10 21 4 4 39 13 4 5 8 30 
			 West Midlands 748 10 22 12 14 58 2 10 5 13 30 
			 West Yorkshire 690 4 1 5 4 14 2 6 1 5 14 
			 Wiltshire 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 
			 England 9,192 80 97 71 96 344 78 93 97 146 414 
			 Dyfed Powys 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Gwent 72 1 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 2 
			 North Wales 167 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 2 7 
			 South Wales 146 0 0 1 3 4 0 3 0 0 3 
			 Wales 420 1 0 1 4 6 4 3 3 2 12 
			 Total E and W 9,612 81 97 72 100 350 82 96 100 148 426 
		
	
	
		
			   2003  2004 
			  CJS area  Jan-Mar  Apr-Jun  Jul-Sep  Oct-Dec  Total  Jan-Mar  Apr-Jun  Jul-Sep  Oct-Dec  Total 
			 Avon and Somerset 1 8 14 8 31 16 20 32 21 89 
			 Bedfordshire 5 3 2 6 16 1 4 9 4 18 
			 Cambridgeshire 5 6 2 2 15 8 6 9 3 26 
			 Cheshire 6 6 10 11 33 8 20 14 20 62 
			 Cleveland 0 2 8 4 14 4 3 7 14 28 
			 Cumbria 6 8 5 1 20 4 8 9 10 31 
			 Derbyshire 4 3 0 3 10 9 17 12 8 46 
			 Devon and Cornwall 2 3 6 1 12 3 22 31 24 80 
			 Dorset 2 4 7 4 17 6 6 18 6 36 
			 Durham 3 0 8 5 16 9 8 4 10 31 
			 Essex 0 2 2 12 16 11 9 15 24 59 
			 Gloucestershire 1 2 4 0 7 3 5 8 10 26 
			 Greater London 10 31 41 57 139 84 94 133 130 441 
			 Greater Manchester 14 60 74 88 236 101 100 114 115 430 
			 Hampshire 4 6 16 17 43 17 27 28 27 99 
			 Hertfordshire 7 1 1 8 17 13 11 12 4 40 
			 Humberside 0 2 5 3 10 4 14 27 27 72 
			 Kent 3 7 1 14 25 6 19 11 18 54 
			 Lancashire 15 13 10 16 54 27 25 38 36 126 
			 Leicestershire 1 2 3 9 15 6 4 10 21 41 
			 Lincolnshire 0 3 1 3 7 5 1 4 2 12 
			 Merseyside 7 6 15 16 44 24 20 25 27 96 
			 Norfolk 5 1 1 0 7 7 8 17 11 43 
			 Northamptonshire 2 1 1 2 6 3 12 8 16 39 
			 Northumbria 5 10 7 3 25 10 16 16 32 74 
			 North Yorkshire 2 0 0 7 9 8 9 11 13 41 
			 Nottinghamshire 1 6 6 8 21 14 18 22 37 91 
			 South Yorkshire 3 10 10 11 34 9 20 25 26 80 
			 Staffordshire 8 7 7 8 30 13 8 25 13 59 
			 Suffolk 7 4 6 8 25 11 16 25 26 78 
			 Surrey 1 2 2 2 7 7 13 13 15 48 
			 Sussex 1 8 9 13 31 6 34 25 32 97 
			 Thames Valley 4 4 2 6 16 12 18 31 16 77 
			 Warwickshire 3 0 5 3 11 9 5 6 8 28 
			 West Mercia 11 5 6 6 28 8 13 15 20 56 
			 West Midlands 24 26 38 31 119 36 51 63 88 238 
			 West Yorkshire 17 17 26 37 97 86 80 69 70 305 
			 Wiltshire 0 1 2 6 9 6 6 4 4 20 
			 England 190 280 363 439 1,272 614 770 945 988 3,317 
			 Dyfed Powys 1 2 8 1 12 4 2 2 0 8 
			 Gwent 1 1 4 2 8 4 5 9 9 27 
			 North Wales 0 6 4 5 15 9 6 12 15 42 
			 South Wales 13 2 3 11 29 4 12 18 12 46 
			 Wales 15 11 19 19 64 21 25 41 36 123 
			 Total England and Wales 205 291 382 458 1,336 635 795 986 1,024 3,440 
		
	
	
		
			   2005 
			  CJS area  Jan-Mar  Apr-Jun  Jul-Sep  Oct-Dec  Total 
			 Avon and Somerset 27 12 11 11 61 
			 Bedfordshire 5 19 6 10 40 
			 Cambridgeshire 14 15 11 10 50 
			 Cheshire 27 30 29 12 98 
			 Cleveland 15 13 17 15 60 
			 Cumbria 11 15 14 9 49 
			 Derbyshire 16 13 11 14 54 
			 Devon and Cornwall 30 16 18 8 72 
			 Dorset 3 6 6 4 19 
			 Durham 4 10 6 7 27 
			 Essex 26 25 15 6 72 
			 Gloucestershire 14 12 3 1 30 
			 Greater London 154 143 118 113 528 
			 Greater Manchester 124 133 115 84 456 
			 Hampshire 32 34 27 19 112 
			 Hertfordshire 21 17 20 14 72 
			 Humberside 36 36 36 29 137 
			 Kent 14 12 10 8 44 
			 Lancashire 33 38 44 33 148 
			 Leicestershire 28 16 4 11 59 
			 Lincolnshire 5 5 5 5 20 
			 Merseyside 39 41 21 27 128 
			 Norfolk 13 13 12 8 46 
			 Northamptonshire 13 8 9 1 31 
			 Northumbria 51 53 42 27 173 
			 North Yorkshire 10 3 11 10 34 
			 Nottinghamshire 41 28 34 23 126 
			 South Yorkshire 34 25 17 28 104 
			 Staffordshire 14 21 16 8 59 
			 Suffolk 11 18 10 14 53 
			 Surrey 14 13 12 10 49 
			 Sussex 22 29 22 21 94 
			 Thames Valley 16 12 12 15 55 
			 Warwickshire 6 9 11 4 30 
			 West Mercia 10 24 18 18 70 
			 West Midlands 92 81 83 47 303 
			 West Yorkshire 58 61 65 76 260 
			 Wiltshire 7 8 5 2 22 
			 England 1,090 1,067 926 762 3,845 
			 Dyfed Powys 1 2 5 7 15 
			 Gwent 7 14 7 5 33 
			 North Wales 23 31 29 20 103 
			 South Wales 15 15 18 16 64 
			 Wales 46 62 59 48 215 
			 Total England and Wales 1,136 1,129 985 810 4,060 
			  Note: Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. 
		
	
	
		
			  Table B : Number of ASBOs issued annually at all courts, where prohibitions have been imposed in local government authority areas in Greater London, 2001-05 
			  Greater London boroughs  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  Total issued 
			 Barking and Dagenham — — 2 4 19 25 
			 Barnet 2 — 1 10 9 22 
			 Bexley — 6 4 4 6 20 
			 Brent — — 8 6 11 25 
			 Bromley — — 5 3 5 13 
			 Camden 1 10 30 57 69 167 
			 City of London Corp — — — 10 6 16 
			 Croydon — — 7 8 10 25 
			 Ealing — — 1 14 9 24 
			 Enfield — — 2 4 15 21 
			 Greenwich 3 1 3 8 11 26 
			 Hackney 1 1 1 15 14 32 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 2 — 4 12 16 34 
			 Haringey — — 5 34 25 64 
			 Harrow — — 1 12 2 15 
			 Havering — — 1 9 19 29 
			 Hillingdon — — — 18 36 54 
			 Hounslow — — 7 23 22 52 
			 Islington — — 10 6 10 26 
			 Kensington and Chelsea Royal Borough — — 1 9 7 17 
			 Kingston-on-Thames — — 4 4 5 13 
			 Lambeth 2 1 2 20 20 45 
			 Lewisham 2 — 5 16 12 35 
			 Merton — 1 2 13 10 26 
			 Newham 2 — — 5 11 18 
			 Redbridge — — 1 8 9 18 
			 Richmond upon Thames — — 3 10 13 26 
			 Southwark — — 8 11 18 37 
			 Sutton — — 7 7 19 33 
			 Tower Hamlets — 1 3 16 36 56 
			 Waltham Forest — — — 15 11 26 
			 Wandsworth — — 6 12 12 30 
			 Westminster — — 6 38 35 79 
			 Total 15 21 140 441 532 1,149 
			  Notes:  1. This local authority area table differs from criminal justice system (CJS) area tables in that an issuing court can be outside the area in which the restrictions have been imposed.  2. Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. 
		
	
	
		
			  Table C:  N umber of persons proven in court to have breached their ASBO in each Criminal Justice System (CJS) area( 1) , in each year, from 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2005 
			  CJS area  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005 
			 Avon and Somerset 5 6 15 52 67 
			 Bedfordshire — 5 9 9 22 
			 Cambridgeshire 3 2 8 14 22 
			 Cheshire — 6 13 43 67 
			 Cleveland 2 5 12 28 58 
			 Cumbria 2 2 17 35 55 
			 Derbyshire 4 5 5 17 36 
			 Devon and Cornwall 3 1 8 18 39 
			 Dorset 1 1 8 25 37 
			 Durham 9 13 20 31 44 
			 Essex — 1 2 29 70 
			 Gloucestershire 1 1 5 13 36 
			 Greater London 9 13 45 182 372 
			 Greater Manchester 9 23 134 308 531 
			 Hampshire — 4 25 66 95 
			 Hertfordshire — 4 7 24 37 
			 Humberside 1 5 7 26 86 
			 Kent 1 2 5 3 6 
			 Lancashire 7 12 35 76 131 
			 Leicestershire 3 — 4 23 47 
			 Lincolnshire — 1 5 9 18 
			 Merseyside 5 4 18 49 96 
			 Norfolk 2 8 5 14 31 
			 North Yorkshire — 5 2 15 25 
			 Northamptonshire — 1 3 3 3 
			 Northumbria — 10 16 36 110 
			 Nottinghamshire 5 6 10 39 80 
			 South Yorkshire 2 8 26 46 82 
			 Staffordshire 1 5 13 25 43 
			 Suffolk 1 1 9 24 50 
			 Surrey 1 2 3 19 41 
			 Sussex 1 4 17 43 87 
			 Thames Valley — 2 8 31 50 
			 Warwickshire — 8 12 18 30 
			 West Mercia 11 18 27 41 67 
			 West Midlands 25 40 84 163 250 
			 West Yorkshire 7 9 38 190 303 
			 Wiltshire — 1 5 12 19 
			 England 121 244 685 1,799 3,243 
			 Dyfed Powys — — 5 5 7 
			 Gwent 2 2 2 18 35 
			 North Wales 1 4 9 20 65 
			 South Wales — 4 14 22 40 
			 Wales 3 10 30 65 147 
			 England and Wales 124 254 715 1,864 3,390 
			 (1) ASBOs may be issued in one area and breached in another. Breaches are counted in this table on area of BREACH.   Notes:  1. It is possible for an individual to breach their ASBO in more than one year, so persons may be counted more than once in this table.  2. Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.   Source:  OCJR Court Proceedings Database.

Antisocial Behaviour Orders: North East Region

Ashok Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many anti-social behaviour orders have been issued in  (a) the North East and  (b) Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland; what percentage have been breached in each case; and what percentage of recipients went on to re-offend.

Vernon Coaker: The number of antisocial behaviour orders (ASBOs) issued at all courts in the north-east region (comprising the Cleveland, Durham and Northumbria Criminal Justice System (CJS) areas) from 1 June 2000 to 31 December 2005 (latest available) is 513. ASBO data are not available at parliamentary constituency level. The number of ASBOs issued at all courts, by the local government authority area in which prohibitions have been imposed in the Cleveland CJS area, is given in the table.
	Information on the number of ASBOs breached is available at CJS area level only. From 1 June 2000 to 31 December 2005 54 per cent. of ASBOs issued in the north-east region were subsequently proven in court to have been breached at least once and 37 per cent. on more than one occasion. The corresponding figures for the Cleveland CJS area are 64 per cent. and 43 per cent. respectively.
	
		
			  Number of ASBOs issued at all courts, as reported to the Home Office by the Court Service, where restrictions are imposed within local authority areas in the Cleveland Criminal Justic e System (CJS) area, 1 June 200 0( 1)  to 31 December 2005 
			  CJS area  Total issued 
			 Cleveland 114 
			  O f which:  
			 Hartlepool borough council 14 
			 Middlesbrough borough council 65 
			 Redcar and Cleveland council 18 
			 Stockton-on-Tees borough council 17 
			 (1) From 1 April 1999 to 31 May 2000 data were collected on aggregate numbers only by police force area (pfa). During this period one ASBO was reported issued in the Cleveland pfa.  Notes: 1. This local authority area table differs from criminal justice system (CJS) area tables in that an issuing court can be outside the area in which the restrictions have been imposed. 2. Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.

Crime: Databases

Jeremy Browne: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he has made of the potential effect on costs in  (a) the private sector and  (b) the public sector of the introduction of data-sharing measures under part 3 of the Serious Crime Bill.

Vernon Coaker: A public sector cost/benefit analysis of the data sharing measures under part 3 of the Serious Crime Bill can be found in the regulatory impact assessment published on the Home Office website.
	http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/Serious-Crime-Bill-RIA.pdf
	We do not envisage the powers leading to additional costs or burdens on the private sector. Our expectation is that where the powers are taken up they will help to lead to reductions in the cost of fraud in both the public and private sector.

Drug Interventions Programme

Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 16 May 2007,  Official Report, column 803W, on the Drug Interventions Programme (DIP), what the DIP budget allocation was for each intensive DIP area in  (a) 2003-04,  (b) 2004-05 and  (c) 2005-06.

Vernon Coaker: My reply of 16 May referred to the Drug Interventions Programme (DIP) Main Grant allocations for 2007-08. As the DIP has evolved, there have been changes to the funding mechanisms each year. These changes have reflected some short-term funding streams and also some integration of separate funding streams to make administration easier at local level.
	Similarly, unlike the constituency of the hon. member, not all the areas named in my reply have been part of the programme since 2003. It is accordingly not possible, except at disproportionate cost, to provide DIP budget allocations for each intensive area for  (a) 2003-04,  (b) 2004-05 and  (c) 2005-06 comparable to that in my reply of 16 May.
	But allocations to areas such as the constituency of the hon. member have been based on the same criteria and I shall be writing to her with a more detailed explanation of the processes and to see if my officials are able to assist her with the purpose of her inquiry.

Human Trafficking: Females

Si�n James: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  what progress Project Reflex has made in combating the trafficking of women to the UK to work as prostitutes;
	(2)  what schemes are in operation to assist women who have escaped prostitution and who were originally trafficked into the UK;
	(3)  what steps he is taking to prevent human trafficking in the UK; and what progress is being made in prosecuting those who participate in the trade.

Vernon Coaker: Reflex, the multi-agency government taskforce on organised immigration crime was set up in March 2000 and has been successful at disrupting organised immigration crime gangs leading to a large number of arrests and seizure of criminal assets. The co-ordination of enforcement work on human trafficking has now moved on with the establishment of the Serious and Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) and the UK Human Trafficking Centre in 2006.
	Reflex under SOCA continues to result in the disruption of organised crime gangs involved in trafficking women for sexual exploitation and has a number of multi-agency programmes of activity in this area. These programmes build on the strategies developed under Reflex. Organised Immigration Crime is SOCA's second priority after drug trafficking.
	The Government have funded the POPPY project since March 2003 to provide safe shelter and support to assist in the recovery of adult female victims who have been trafficked into the UK for the purposes of sexual exploitation.
	The Government's strategy to prevent human trafficking has a number of different elements. These include research and intelligence gathering to improve our knowledge and understanding of the scale and nature of human trafficking in the UK; awareness raising and capacity building in source and transit countries; and measures designed to address the demand for trafficked persons.
	The Government are also working with source countries to tackle the problem of trafficking at its root. We have provided funds for various anti-trafficking projects in the Western Balkans region, West Africa (including Benin, Burkina Faso, Gabon, Ghana, Niger and Togo) and in the Greater Mekong region (parts of Cambodia, China, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam).
	The UK Action on tackling human trafficking published on 23 March 2007 provides further details of the work being undertaken across Government to tackle human trafficking.

Immigrants: Employment

John Greenway: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many employers have been prosecuted for illegally employing irregular migrants during the last 12 months.

Liam Byrne: The information requested could be obtained only by the detailed examination of individual records at disproportionate cost.
	Published statistics are not available for the period requested; the latest 12 month period for which information can be provided is 2005. In 2005, 23 employers were proceeded against under section 8 of the Asylum and Immigration Act 1996 (employing a person aged 16 or above subject to immigration control and who is not entitled to work in the UK or to undertake the employment in question) in the magistrates courts. No persons were tried for the same offence at the Crown court in 2005.
	We recognise that the number of prosecutions under section 8 is low, and that that is why we have committed to bring forward the introduction of measures contained in the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 to tackle illegal migrant working, which will provide the Border and Immigration Agency with a range of tools with which to tackle non-compliance. The 2006 Act introduces a system of civil penalties for employers who through negligence employ illegal migrant workers, alongside a tough new offence for those knowingly employing illegal workers, which will carry a maximum two year prison sentence and/or an unlimited fine. These new measures will come into force in late 2007.
	On 15 May 2007 the Border and Immigration Agency published 'Prevention of illegal working; Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006; Consultation on the implementation of new powers to prevent illegal migrant working in the UK'. This document contains our action plan for tackling illegal working. Copies have been placed in the House Library and can be downloaded from the Border and Immigration Agency website at:
	http://www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/lawandpolicy/consultationdocuments/currentconsultations

Departments: Eligo International Ltd.

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what the  (a) date,  (b) value and  (c) purpose was of each payment made by her Department or its agencies to Eligo International Ltd. since 1997.

Geoff Hoon: There is no record of payments made by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) in the UK to Eligo International Ltd. in this time frame. To establish whether FCO missions overseas have made payments to the company would require each post to check accounts for each of the last 10 years. This would incur disproportionate cost.

Russia: Nuclear Weapons

Denis MacShane: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if she will make a statement on President Putin's threat to acquire new targets in Europe for Russian nuclear missiles.

Geoff Hoon: The UK supports US plans to deploy missile defence assets in Europe. These limited deployments can not undermine a Russian deterrent with missiles still numbered in the hundreds and warheads in the thousands. President Putin since said, in the margins of the G8 Summit, that Russia is proposing co-operation with the US on Ballistic Missile Defence which 'will allow Russia not to change our position on not targeting our missiles'.

Sri Lanka: Peace Negotiations

Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions have been held with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, other Tamil groups and the Government of Sri Lanka on a possible ceasefire agreement; and if she will make a statement.

Kim Howells: I visited Sri Lanka on 11 June and held discussions with President Rajapakse, senior government Ministers, the Leader of the Opposition, a senior Tamil National Alliance parliamentarian and representatives of non-governmental organisations. UK Government officials also have occasional contact with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in pursuit of the peace process. We urge all the parties to the conflict in Sri Lanka to stop using violence. There can be no military solution.

Turkey: Religious Freedom

Anthony Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reports she has received of the murders of Tilman Geske, Necati Aydin and Ugur Yuksel on 18 April 2007 in Malatya, Turkey; what representations she has made to the Government of Turkey on violence against Christian minorities; and if she will make a statement.

Geoff Hoon: The Government condemn the recent attack in Malatya and welcomes the Turkish Government's determination to bring the perpetrators to justice. We note the detention of 10 suspects and continue to follow developments closely.
	Our embassy in Ankara reports regularly on human rights issues in Turkey, including freedom of religion. We also receive reports from the European Commission and other international organisations.
	Through regular bilateral discussions, we continue to urge Turkey to keep up the momentum of its human rights reform and to ensure that implementation of EU standards is full and consistent.

USA: Ballistic Missile Defence

Dai Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions she has had with  (a) the United States Administration and  (b) her European Union counterparts on the effects on European security of the placing of anti-ballistic missile systems in eastern European Union countries; and what representations she has made to the Russian Government on President Putin's criticisms of anti-ballistic missile systems deployment.

Geoff Hoon: I refer the hon. Member to the reply my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary gave to the right hon. Member for Richmond, Yorks (Mr. Hague) on 4 June 2007,  Official Report, column 237W, and the reply given by my hon. Friend the Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Dr. Howells) to the hon. Member for Mid-Norfolk (Mr. Simpson) on 28 February 2007,  Official Report, column 1375W. I have had no additional discussions with the US Government or EU Foreign Ministers. The UK is engaged in discussion of this issue through NATO (including the NATO-Russia Council) and other fora.

Faith Schools: Admissions Policies

Evan Harris: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what assessment she has made of the effect on community cohesion and the integration of young people from different religious and racial backgrounds of the practice of discrimination on religious grounds in the admissions policies of faith schools.

Phil Woolas: All school governing bodies now have a duty to promote community cohesion and this element of what they do will be inspected by Ofsted from September this year.

Home Information Packs

Philip Hollobone: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what compensation is available to  (a) business and  (b) individual providers who have undertaken preparation and training for the introduction of home information packs.

Yvette Cooper: The proposals we set out on 22 May will mean assessors will be able to begin work shortly. From 1 August, assessors will also start work with four bedroom properties and larger. We are inviting councils and registered social landlords to work with us to pilot the introduction of Energy Performance Certificates on a voluntary basis in social housing.

Alcoholic Drinks: Misuse

Julie Morgan: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps her Department is taking to discourage binge-drinking.

Caroline Flint: In the Government's Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy, published in 2004, binge drinkers were a key target audience for new messages to be targeted by Government in their communications. This supported a wider programme of action by the Home Office to bear down on alcohol-related antisocial behaviour involving young people.
	As a result, the Department launched Know Your Limits, the Government's first national campaign regarding alcohol. It focuses on young people who binge drink because research shows that 18 to 24-year-olds are most likely to drink irresponsibly and cause harm to themselves and others. Evaluation of the campaign demonstrated that it has been highly effective in raising awareness and has had a high level of recall among young people.
	The Government's renewed alcohol strategy, Safe. Sensible. Social. The next steps in the National Alcohol Strategy was published on 5 June 2007, and contains a detailed programme of work to minimise the health harms, violence and antisocial behaviour associated with alcohol, while ensuring that people are able to enjoy alcohol safely and responsibly.
	To help deliver this commitment, the Government are committed to continuing its investment in the Know Your Limits campaign and will run activity before peak drinking times, such as Christmas and new year. We will also seek ways to broaden and widen the audience reach.

Blood Transfusions

Brian Iddon: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps she is taking to provide  (a) ethryropoietins and  (b) other alternatives to blood transfusions to appropriate patients.

Caroline Flint: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 2 May 2007,  Official Report, columns 1771-72W.

Community Care: Fees and Charges

Howard Stoate: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment she has made since the introduction of Fairer Charging Policies for Home Care and non-residential Social servicesGuidance for Councils with Social Services Responsibilities of the impact on home care service users in England of the ability of local authorities with social services responsibilities to set their own charging schemes for home care services.

Ivan Lewis: The Department has not made any assessment. It is for councils to decide on how to set charges for non-residential social services. The legal basis is that charges generally should be reasonable, and that no one should be asked to pay more than they reasonably can.
	Until the guidance on home care charges, Fairer Charging Policies for Home Care and other non-residential Social Services, was implemented, councils with social services responsibilities operated under few constraints or guidelines on how to charge for home care and practice varied widely. Fairer Charging Policies is statutory guidance, issued under section 7 of the Local Authority Social Services Act 1970; councils must have regard to it.
	The guidance, which was issued in 2001 and amended in 2003 to reflect the introduction of pension credits, does not seek to change councils' power to charge, or not, for services. It seeks to ensure that, where councils do charge, this will be based on fairer, well designed charging policies. In particular, it aims to ensure that service users on low incomes are protected from charging and that any charges levied on disability benefits are subject to an assessment of disability costs, to ensure their reasonableness.
	Local authorities have discretion as to whether they charge people receiving benefits for domiciliary care or not. However, if they do decide to do so, the guidance states very clearly that service users should not have their incomes reduced below basic levels of income support or the guarantee credit of pension credit, plus a buffer of 25 per cent., as a result of charges.

Community Hospitals

Christopher Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many community hospitals  (a) closed and  (b) opened in (i) rural and (ii) non-rural areas in each year since 1997; and if she will make a statement.

Andy Burnham: This information is not collected centrally. The Government are committed to ensuring more health services are delivered in community settings and is making an additional 750 million worth of capital funding available to support the development of community hospitals and services.

Haemophilia

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the Service Level Agreement is for the provision of Recombinant Factor VIII in each strategic health authority in England.

Caroline Flint: Funding for the provision of Recombinant Factor VIII for each strategic health authority (SHA) is in the SHA bundle, that incorporates a number of budgets formally managed directly by the Department. The value of the SHA bundle for 2007-08 is 6,945.78 million, and was announced in the NHS Operating Framework that was published on 11 December to the NHS. Allocations are made direct to SHAs, and they manage the distribution of funds among the different programmes, including for Recombinant Factor VIII, taking account of local circumstances.

Health Hazards: Mobile Phones

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent studies her Department has  (a) commissioned and  (b) received on the potential health hazards from (i) mobile phone masts and (ii) handheld mobile phones; and if she will make a statement.

Caroline Flint: The Stewart Report in 2000 comprehensively reviewed the scientific literature and concluded that the balance of evidence to date suggests that exposures below international guidelines do not cause health effects to the general population (www.iegmp.org.uk). Handheld mobile phones and base station installations in the United Kingdom are designed to comply with international exposure guidelines. The Stewart Report, however, also recommended further research as part of an overall precautionary approach to the use of mobile phone technology pending the availability of more robust scientific research results.
	The independently managed Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research (MTHR) programme, jointly funded by Government and industry, was set up in 2001 in response to the Stewart Report recommendations. It is currently supporting a number of studies into the possible health effects of technology relating to masts (base stations) and handheld mobile phones. These studies, some in progress and some already published, are described on the MTHR website at
	www.mthr.org.uk.
	Research on the potential health effects from mobile phone technology is evaluated periodically by the Health Protection Agency's Radiation Protection Division. The report entitled Mobile Phones and Health 2004 (Documents of the NRPB, Volume 15, No. 5) is available in the Library and at
	www.hpa.org.uk/radiation.

Hyperactivity: Drugs

Theresa May: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people in  (a) England and  (b) Maidenhead were prescribed methylphenidate drugs in each year between 1997 and 2006.

Caroline Flint: The Department does not hold data on the number of patients prescribed methylphenidate hydrochloride drugs. In terms of the number of prescription items dispensed in the community in England, I refer the right hon. Member to the answer given on 9 May,  Official Report, column 279W.
	Data on the number of prescription items prescribed in the community and then dispensed are collected at primary care trust (PCT) level. The equivalent PCTs to the constituency of Maidenhead are the combination of Berkshire East PCT (formerly Bracknell Forest, Windsor, Ascot and Maidenhead and Slough) and Berkshire West PCT (formerly Newbury and Community, Reading and Wokingham) created in October 2006.
	Data for these combined PCTs are provided in the following table.
	
		
			   Thousand 
			   Number of prescription items dispensed 
			 2003 4.9 
			 2004 5.6 
			 2005 5.7 
			 2006 6.9 
			  Note: Local data are from the prescription pricing division's (PPD's) prescribing analysis and cost tool (PACT) system. This is held for a maximum of 60 months only, therefore data areprovided from 2003 onwards.  Source: Prescribing Analysis and Cost Tool (PACT) system

Insulin

Adrian Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will place in the Library a copy of the draft proposal for submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence asking the institute to consider including a comparison of the different types of insulin in its future work programme, as referred to in the letter of 19 December 2006 to the hon. Member for Torbay from the Minister for Quality and Delivery.

Caroline Flint: The National Clinical Director for Diabetes, Dr. Sue Roberts, has convened a liaison group to inform the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence's (NICE) work programme on a range of diabetes issues. This approach has been taken to support NICE in addressing and reflecting the needs of the diabetes community.
	The group is due to meet shortly, and will discuss a range of diabetes issues, including the therapeutic use of insulins.

Medical Records: EC Countries

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans she has  (a) to permit and  (b) to implement the transfer of patient information between member states of the European Union, as referred to in paragraph 3.1.1. of the European Commission's Consultation on Community Action on Health Services, published on 26 September 2006.

Caroline Flint: In collaboration with the European Commission and other European health administrations we are exploring ways in which citizens could, if they so choose, make key health data available when seeking treatment in other European states, subject to stringent confidentiality safeguards. This work is at a very early stage and complex technical and information governance issues have yet to be resolved. In particular, any transfer of patient information would need to be in line with the undertakings given in the NHS Care Record Guarantee, and subject to compliance with the European Union Data Protection Directive.
	The consultation acknowledges work that is already under way in some member states in developing interoperability standards for electronic medical records. The Department's NHS Connecting for Health agency is in fact the global leader in healthcare interoperability. NHS Connecting for Health have developed the message implementation manual which uses the international standard HL7V3 to define a standards-based approach to clinical message interchange. These messages are used by the systems which have been through the NHS Connecting for Health national integration centre, to create the largest range of heterogeneous interoperable systems in healthcare globally, with in excess of a hundred certified systems. This interoperability framework is underpinned by a robust and resilient messaging infrastructure, known as the spine, which already supports the transfer of many millions of messages every week across the national health service.
	Another key aspect of healthcare system interoperability is the consistent use of a clinical terminology. NHS Connecting for Health have been instrumental in the establishment, and are a founding member of the Standards Development Organisation, which has acquired the intellectual property rights for SNOMED-CT, an international standard for codifying clinical data.

Members: Correspondence

John Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when her Department will respond to the letter from the hon. Member for Billericay of 16 May 2007 on the proposed Independent Sector Treatment Centre for Basildon.

Andy Burnham: The reply to the hon. Member's letter of 14 March, which was the subject of his further letter, was sent on 16 May.

NHS: Drugs

Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether the infrastructure payment for services proposed in her Department's consultation, Arrangements for the remuneration of services relating to appliances within Part IX of the Drug Tariff, is proposed to apply to dispensing appliance contractors differently dependent on their output; and if she will make a statement.

Caroline Flint: In reviewing the arrangements under Part IX of the Drug Tariff, it has always been one of the Department's stated objectives to ensure fair remuneration of valued services provided by the pharmacy and appliance contractors.
	In the consultation document entitled Arrangements for the remuneration of services relating to appliances within Part IX of the Drug Tariff, it was proposed that dispensing appliance contractors would receive a banded infrastructure payment depending on the volume of prescription items dispensed in one particular month. The purpose of this payment is to cover elements of service that are less volume-related compared to dispensing, such as operating within a clinical governance framework, requirements relating to dispensing repeatable prescriptions and provision of clinical information.
	Views were sought on this proposal and the consultation closed on 2 April 2007. The Department is still evaluating the responses and it is not anticipated that the overall review will be completed until the end of the year.

NHS: Drugs

Barry Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what plans she has to trial the drug PTC-124;
	(2)  what plans she has for fast tracking new drugs and therapies for Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

Ivan Lewis: PTC124 is a drug currently undergoing clinical trials in the United States for the treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy. PTC Therapeutics, the company behind this drug, has not currently organised clinical trials in the United Kingdom.
	We have no specific plans to fast track new drugs or therapies for the treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency has not received an application to licence PTC124.

NHS: ICT

Mark Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how has been spent on IT systems in the NHS since 1997.

Caroline Flint: The information is not available in the form requested.
	Such information as is available derives from revenue expenditure reported each year since 2002-03 through a national survey of information technology investment; and from capital expenditure, including software licences, identified in national health service accounts, and as reported by foundation trusts. The figures do not include expenditure by special health authorities or central expenditure funded by the Department.
	Summary figures for the latest year for which information is available (2005-06) is contained in the reply given to the hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire (Mr. Lansley) on 5 March 2007,  Official Report, columns 1693-94W.
	Detailed information for 2005-06, including summary information for years since 2002-03, is available on the Department's NHS Connecting for Health agency website at www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/resources/funding and has been placed in the Library.

NHS: ICT

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make available the gateway reviews undertaken by the Office of Government Commerce on the national programme for IT.

Caroline Flint: I have no current plans to do so.

NHS: ICT

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what action she has taken in response to each of the recommendations of Section 9 of the National Audit Office report on the national programme for IT in the NHS.

Caroline Flint: Where the National Audit Office recommendations called for specific or new action to be taken by the Department, its NHS Connecting for Health agency, or by national health service bodies, action plans have been put in place. Progress towards the various deliverables is being routinely monitored against their respective timescales, some of which have already been achieved.
	In relation to individual recommendations:
	A national programme catalogue has been created and made available to all NHS organisations and staff. The purpose of the catalogue is to demonstrate how the NHS Connecting for Health products currently available support wider NHS policies and initiatives by detailing their functionality and the benefits they can deliver to patients, clinicians and organisations. Regular updates will ensure its continuing relevance and value. Work is ongoing with suppliers and the NHS to agree engineering-based timetables for delivery and to ensure that these timetables take NHS requirements into account. Governance arrangements are in place to consider any changes which impact upon local service providers in order to ensure that suppliers can achieve what is planned.
	The national programme communications strategy has been reviewed and updated. Ways of working with strategic health authority (SHA) communications leads have been agreed and implemented. A plan of key milestones for delivery of the programme is being developed for communication with NHS organisations and staff.
	NHS Connecting for Health continues its strong management of suppliers and their performance.
	The first annual benefits report, for 2006-07, will be produced in autumn 2007 to coincide with the publication of planning materials for NHS organisations. Future annual benefits reports will be produced in partnership with the strategic health authorities.
	The annual survey of NHS information management and technology expenditure is being complemented by studies of the impact of national programme deployments on local NHS IT expenditure.
	Post-implementation reviews are being carried out to identify and quantify the service and efficiency improvements of new IT systems. The Department and NHS Connecting for Health, in partnership with the SHAs, are supporting a series of benefits demonstrators at local sites that will evaluate experiences and compile evidence of benefits achieved.
	Analysis of current areas for improvement is taking place in order to produce evidence-based development plans to create sustainable capability in the NHS. A range of projects, and training and development elements, are being grouped together under a capability and capacity work stream, and the education, training and development work stream is being strengthened.
	Relevant and appropriate clinicians continue to contribute to the effective identification of requirements, design and testing of systems being delivered under the programme. NHS Connecting for Health has appointed a Chief Clinical Officer to lead the clinical engagement and clinical contribution the programme. A national clinical lead for patient safety has been appointed. Further national clinical leads are to be recruited for pharmacy, physiotherapy, mental health and midwifery. Consideration is being given to how to take on other national clinical leads to cover important areas of engagement.

Prescriptions: Fees and Charges

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will  (a) reduce prescription costs and  (b) abolish charges completely; and if she will make a statement.

Caroline Flint: The Government said in their response to the Health Select Committee's report on national health service charges, that the Department would undertake a review of the current exemptions for prescription charges and put forward options that would be expenditure neutral for the NHS. We have undertaken to report to Parliament before the summer recess 2007.

Burundi: Education

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if he will provide a breakdown of how the 6 million funding for education in Burundi announced on 5 April is proposed to be spent; and what the timescale is for the release of the funding.

Hilary Benn: The 6 million I announced as part of a package of support for education initiatives in post-conflict and fragile states will be spent over the next three years in support of the government of Burundi's action plan to implement the initial priorities of its 10-year education strategy.
	The plan will meet Burundi's immediate needs in rebuilding an education system severely affected by the more than 12 years of devastating civil war, and lay the foundations for the development of an education system that can deliver equitable, high-quality education and professional training, and meet the target of primary education for all.
	The plan is expected to be finalised by September, and once endorsed by donors, submitted along with the sector strategy to the fast-track initiative (FTI) for additional financing. If fully financed, it is anticipated that almost 10,000 extra primary school classrooms will be built, over 4,000 extra primary school teachers will be trained and recruited, and that total spending on education will be more than doubled.
	The UK's funds will be pooled with those of other donors to minimise the administrative burden on the government, facilitate a strengthening of the government's capacity to deliver education services and encourage others to contribute to the reconstruction of Burundi's education system.

Crop-Post Harvest

Michael Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development on what date his Department commenced funding for the Crop-Post Harvest programme; what his Department's total expenditure has been on the programme; which projects have been funded by the programme; which institutions are funded to carry out each project in the programme and what amounts have been allocated by his Department to each and over what period in each case; in which country each project was based; what the outcome has been of each project; what assessment he has made of the impact on host harvest crop losses and other gains; and what the closing date is for his Department's funding for the programme.

Gareth Thomas: DFID started funding the crop post harvest programme (CPHP) in April 1995. The programme was designed to run for 10 years, until March 2005. However an additional year was added from April 2005 to March 2006 to allow for greater dissemination of findings. Total expenditure was 28,529,870.
	A total of 170 projects were completed up until 2005 and a full list with details of each project is available at:
	http://www.cphp.uk.com/projects/default.asp?step=11
	or through DFID's searchable research database at:
	http://www.research4development.info/index.asp.
	CPHP was evaluated as part of the overall evaluation of the renewable natural resources research strategy (RNRRS 1995-2006) by an external independent team which found the outputs of the CPHP to be:
	...impressive and demonstrate well-planned and conducted studies. (annex 10, page 355).
	The full report is available at:
	http://www.dfid.gov.uk/aboutdfid/performance/files/ev659.asp.

Developing Countries: Poverty

David Anderson: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what progress has been made on meeting the 2005 G8 commitments on poverty relief; and if he will make a statement.

Hilary Benn: There has been some good progress in delivering the commitments made at Gleneagles and elsewhere in July 2005. DFID submits a regular report to Parliament detailing the UK's progress against agreed milestones. Globally there has been a significant rise in global aid. It has increased by 25 per cent. to just over $100 billion since 2004.
	At this year's summit there was important progress especially on education and HIV/AIDS. Yet there is still much more to do, particularly on trade, and we are working closely with donors and African governments to make sure that the commitments are fully implemented.

Iraq: Reconstruction

Keith Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what body is responsible for the oversight of UK-funded reconstruction projects in Iraq; and if he will make a statement.

Hilary Benn: holding answer 11 June 2007
	In close co-ordination with the FCO and MOD, DFID is responsible for the oversight of reconstruction projects in Iraq under the auspices of the International Development Act 2002. Our programme is managed from London with support from our offices in Baghdad and Basra.
	Our priority is to build the capacity of the Iraqi government to manage and spend its own resources effectively to deliver improved public services. We are also looking at options for supporting reconciliation and ways to reduce the level of violence. Finally, we are supporting humanitarian agencies to provide assistance to the four million displaced people in Iraq and neighbouring countries.
	The UK has pledged 744 million for reconstruction and development in Iraq since 2003. So far 610 million has been disbursed, of which 488 million has been spent by DFID (including EC contributions). This includes over 125 million to support humanitarian agencies since 2003 (10 million of which has been spent in 2007).
	DFID has reporting arrangements in place for each of our own projects. All of DFID's funds are subject to rigorous internal controls and the National Audit Office audits DFID's accounts on an annual basis. Our 2005-06 audited resource accounts are available at http://www.dfid.gov.uk/aboutdfid/resource-accounts.asp. In addition our work is regularly scrutinised by the International Development Select Committee.

Palestinians: EC Aid

William Hague: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what  (a) UK government and  (b) EU studies have been undertaken into the effectiveness of the temporary international mechanism in delivering aid to the Palestinians; and if he will make a statement.

Hilary Benn: The European Commission and the World Bank are working on an assessment of the effectiveness of the Temporary International Mechanism. A report is expected at the end of this month. The UK is not carrying out a separate assessment.

Sierra Leone: Education

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if he will provide a breakdown of how the 9 million funding for education in Sierra Leone announced on 5 April is proposed to be spent; and what the timescale is for the release of the funding.

Hilary Benn: The 9 million funding for education in Sierra Leone is the proportion of our budget support over the next four years that can be attributed to the education sector, based on continued budget support to Sierra Leone at current levels. The amount is calculated based on the proportion of overall government of Sierra Leone expenditure that goes to the education sector. In 2006 the government expenditure was divided up as follows:
	
		
			   Percentage 
			 Teachers' salaries 61 
			 Ministry Wages 1 
			 Grants in aid, library board, planning and development services 5 
			 Pre-primary non-wage 6 
			 Secondary non-wage 6 
			 Tertiary and teachers' education 19 
			 Technical/vocational 1 
			 Capital costs 1 
		
	
	The government of Sierra Leone has recently approved a 10-year education sector plan, which the Fast Track Initiative Catalytic Fund Strategy Committee agreed to partly fund, in Bonn on 23 May 2007. DFID stands ready to support this plan, along with other donors, and to help ensure that any financing gap is filled.